Search for: "Disciplinary Counsel v. York"
Results 141 - 160
of 410
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
10 May 2019, 4:30 am
United States v. [read post]
9 May 2019, 4:00 am
”On January 26, 2017, respondent brought disciplinary charges against petitioner pursuant to Education Law §3020-a based upon allegations of corporal punishment. [read post]
9 May 2019, 4:00 am
”On January 26, 2017, respondent brought disciplinary charges against petitioner pursuant to Education Law §3020-a based upon allegations of corporal punishment. [read post]
9 May 2019, 4:00 am
”On January 26, 2017, respondent brought disciplinary charges against petitioner pursuant to Education Law §3020-a based upon allegations of corporal punishment. [read post]
9 May 2019, 4:00 am
”On January 26, 2017, respondent brought disciplinary charges against petitioner pursuant to Education Law §3020-a based upon allegations of corporal punishment. [read post]
3 Apr 2019, 4:59 am
In Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. [read post]
3 Apr 2019, 4:59 am
In Office of Disciplinary Counsel v. [read post]
2 Apr 2019, 7:00 am
After Waymo v. [read post]
2 Apr 2019, 7:00 am
After Waymo v. [read post]
18 Mar 2019, 5:52 pm
§ 45-2-103), which makes the statute overbroad under New York Times v. [read post]
18 Mar 2019, 4:00 am
In York v McGuire, 63 NY2d 760, the Court of Appeals set out the basic rule concerning the dismissal of probationary employees as follows: “After completing his or her minimum period of probation* and prior to completing his or her maximum period of probation, a probationary employee can be dismissed without a hearing and without a statement of reasons, as long as there is no proof that the dismissal was done for a constitutionally impermissible purpose, or in violation… [read post]
18 Mar 2019, 4:00 am
In York v McGuire, 63 NY2d 760, the Court of Appeals set out the basic rule concerning the dismissal of probationary employees as follows: “After completing his or her minimum period of probation* and prior to completing his or her maximum period of probation, a probationary employee can be dismissed without a hearing and without a statement of reasons, as long as there is no proof that the dismissal was done for a constitutionally impermissible purpose, or in violation… [read post]
31 Jan 2019, 4:01 am
Lilley appealed.Citing Matter of Kowaleski [New York State Dept. of Correctional Servs.], 16 NY3d 85, the Appellate Division noted that "Civil Service Law §75-b prohibits a public employer from taking disciplinary action to retaliate against an employee for reporting improper governmental action. [read post]
24 Jan 2019, 4:00 am
Further, said the Appellate Division, the records, which contain factual details regarding misconduct allegations and punishments imposed on officers, could contain "material ripe for degrading, embarrassing, harassing or impeaching the integrity of [the] officer[s]," citing New York Civil Liberties Union v New York City Police Department, 2018 NY Slip Op 0842. [read post]
24 Jan 2019, 4:00 am
Further, said the Appellate Division, the records, which contain factual details regarding misconduct allegations and punishments imposed on officers, could contain "material ripe for degrading, embarrassing, harassing or impeaching the integrity of [the] officer[s]," citing New York Civil Liberties Union v New York City Police Department, 2018 NY Slip Op 0842. [read post]
7 Jan 2019, 3:45 am
A selected Federal Government candidate will be assigned to the equivalent of Executive Schedule Level V. [read post]
21 Dec 2018, 4:00 am
Procedural considerations relevant to conducting a disciplinary hearing pursuant to §75 of the Civil Service LawTinter v Board of Trustees of the Pound Ridge Lib. [read post]
21 Dec 2018, 4:00 am
Procedural considerations relevant to conducting a disciplinary hearing pursuant to §75 of the Civil Service LawTinter v Board of Trustees of the Pound Ridge Lib. [read post]
17 Dec 2018, 8:47 am
A selected Federal Government candidate will be assigned to the equivalent of Executive Schedule Level V. [read post]
17 Dec 2018, 4:00 am
Liberties Union v New York City Police Dept., 2018 NY Slip Op 08423, Court of AppealsNew York State's Civil Rights Law §50-a requires that police officer personnel records be kept confidential and sets out a procedure to obtain a court order of disclosure of such records. [read post]